Copenhagen 2016 Registration Programme Exhibitor Information Virtual Exhibition Satellite Meetings Glaucoma Day 2016 Hotel Star Alliance
title

10 - 14 Sept. 2016, Bella Center, Copenhagen, Denmark

This Meeting has been awarded 27 CME credits

 

escrs app advert yo advert

Myopic laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) outcomes using three different laser platforms: Allegretto vs Esiris vs Technolas

Search Title by author or title

Session Details

Session Title: Surface Photoablation

Session Date/Time: Monday 12/09/2016 | 14:30-16:30

Paper Time: 14:54

Venue: Hall C1

First Author: : M.Garcia-Gonzalez SPAIN

Co Author(s): :    I. Rodriguez-Perez   J. Gros-Otero   P. Drake Rodriguez-Casanova   J. Sanchez-Pina           

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To compare the visual and refractive outcomes of laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) for the correction of myopia using three different excimer lasers: Allegretto® (WaveLight Laser Technologie AG), Esiris® (Schwind Eye Tech Solutions, Kleinostheim) and Technolas® 217C (Bausch & Lomb Surgical, Claremont, CA)

Setting:

Clínica Novovisión, Madrid, Spain. Clínica Rementería, Madrid, Spain. Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias, Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain.

Methods:

We performed a retrospective study of 394 consecutive eyes that underwent LASEK with the adjuvant use of mitomycin C for the correction of myopia. We compared 122 eyes treated with LASEK using Allegretto® excimer laser versus 135 refraction-matched eyes treated with Esiris® versus 137 refraction-matched eyes treated with Technolas®. All the procedures were performed by the same surgeon. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA) and refractive outcomes were evaluated 1 day, 1 week, and 1 and 3 months postoperatively.

Results:

No significant differences were found in the mean UDVA at 1 day, 1 week and 1 month postoperatively among groups. 3 months after LASEK, Allegretto provided statistically significant better outcomes compared to both Esiris and Technolas in terms of postoperative UDVA (1.11±0.2 vs 1.01±0.2 vs 0.98±0.2) (P=0.0001), BCDVA (1.13±0.2 vs 1.10±0.1 vs 1.04±0.2) (P=0.0001), residual sphere (-0.01±0.2 vs +0.29±0.7 vs +0.27±0.6) (P=0.0001), residual cylinder (-0.06±0.3 vs -0.37±0.5 vs -0.26±0.5) (P=0.0001) and efficacy index (0.99±0.2 vs 0.90±0.2 vs 0.91±0.2) (P=0.0004). No significant differences were found in the safety index (1.00±0.1 vs 1.07±0.9 vs 0.96±0.1) (P=0.3) among Allegretto, Esiris and Technolas, respectively.

Conclusions:

Our study suggests that Allegretto, Esiris and Technolas excimer lasers are safe, effective and predictable when performing a LASEK procedure for the correction of myopia. However, slightly but significantly better visual and refractive outcomes were observed in Allegretto-treated eyes in a 3-month follow-up.

Financial Disclosure:

NONE

Back to previous